The Slater condition is generic in linear conic programming
|
|
- Vincent Hill
- 7 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 The Slater condition is generic in linear conic programming Mirjam Dür Bolor Jargalsaikhan Georg Still November 9, 2012 Abstract We call a property generic if it holds for almost all problem instances. For linear conic problems, it has been shown in the literature that properties like uniqueness, strict complementarity or nondegeneracy of the optimal solution are generic under the assumption that Slater s condition is fulfilled. The possibility that Slater s condition generically fails has not been excluded. In this paper, we close this gap by proving that Slater s condition is generic in linear conic programs. We also summarize genericity results of other properties and discuss connections between them. Keywords: Conic programs; Slater s condition; generic properties Mathematical Subject Classification 2010: 90C25, 90C31 University of Trier, Department of Mathematics, Trier, Germany. duer@uni-trier.de University of Groningen, Johann Bernoulli Institute for Mathematics and Computer Science, P.O. Box 407, 9700 AK Groningen, The Netherlands. B.Jargalsaikhan@rug.nl University of Twente, Department of Applied Mathematics, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands. g.still@math.utwente.nl 1
2 1 Introduction We consider the following pair of conic problems in what we might call standard form : max s.t. c T x X := B n i=1 x ia i K (P 0 ) where c R n, B, A i (i = 1,..., n) are matrices in S k, the set of symmetric k k-matrices, and K S k is a pointed full-dimensional closed convex cone. The dual problem of (P 0 ) is min B, Y s.t. A i, Y = c i, i = 1,..., n, Y K, (D 0 ) where K is the dual cone of K with respect to the inner product,. Note that S k R m with m := 1 2 (k + 1)k. A variety of problems such as linear programs, semidefinite programs, second order cone programs and copositive/completely positive programs can be formulated as conic problems for appropriate cones K. We say that Slater s condition holds for (P 0 ) if there exists X = B n i=1 x ia i int K. Likewise, we say that Slater s condition holds for (D 0 ) if there exists Y int K which fulfills the constraints A i, Y = c i for all i. We call a property generic, if it holds for almost all instances. More precisely, assume that the instances of a certain problem class can be parametrized in some way. Then we say that a property is generic if the set of parameters describing problem instances where the property fails has measure zero. Genericity of properties like nondegeneracy, strict complementarity and uniqueness of solutions of linear conic programs have been discussed before. Alizadeh, Haeberly, and Overton [1] as well as Shapiro [14] specifically discuss generic properties of SDPs. Pataki and Tunçel [12] obtain genericity results on strict complementarity, uniqueness, and nondegeneracy for general linear conic programs. However, the results in [1] have been proven under the assumption that the Slater condition is satisfied, and in [12], the genericity results are restricted to gap-free problems (i.e., problems with finite optimal value and zero duality gap). The possibility that these assumptions generically fail has not been excluded, so these genericity results lack a foundation. Merely for the SDP case, it is indicated in [14, p. 310] that the Slater condition (resp. the Mangasarian-Fromovitz condition) is generic. The aim of this article is to close this gap and prove genericity of Slater s condition for linear problems over arbitrary proper cones. More specifically, we show that in linear conic programming for almost all feasible pairs of problems the primal and dual Slater conditions 2
3 hold. Note that the Slater condition also ensures a zero duality gap. Usually, genericity results are proven by applying transversality theory from differential topology. We refer to [9] for such genericity results in smooth nonlinear finite programming, and to [1] for results for semidefinite programming. However, to obtain genericity results for general conic programming these transversality theorems can not be used since the boundaries of general convex cones cannot be described by smooth manifolds. One needs genericity results for convex functions (Lipschitz functions), a theory that has been developed in the area of geometric measure theory. Founding work for this was done by Federer and others (see e.g. [11] for an overview). The results in [12] are based on this theory. In this paper, instead of using transversality theory, we will use results from measure theory as outlined in Section 2.1. Throughout the paper, we make the following assumption: Assumption 1.1. The matrices A 1,..., A n n-dimensional linear space in S k. are linearly independent, i.e., they span an Clearly, this assumption poses no loss of generality. Moreover, a standard result in differential topology (see e.g. [9]) states that for almost all sets {A i } n i=1, the matrices A i are linearly independent. Therefore, Assumption 1.1 is satisfied generically. Note that this assumption implies that X := B n i=1 x ia i is uniquely determined by x. 2 Auxiliary results 2.1 A useful result on the boundary of convex sets Roughly speaking, Slater s condition says that the feasible set of the problem is not contained in the boundary of the convex cone. For this reason, it is intuitive that the proof of our main result should be based on properties of this boundary. More specifically, we will use the fact that the boundary of a convex set has measure zero, a result which is known but for which we give a proof here to make the paper self-contained: Lemma 2.1. Let T be a full-dimensional closed convex set in R s. Then the boundary of T has s-dimensional Lebesgue measure zero. Proof. We repeat here the elegant proof of [10]. Consider an open ball B ε (p) with center p bd T and radius ε > 0. Since there exists a hyperplane supporting the convex set T at p, at least half of the ball does not contain points of T. Therefore, µ(t B ε (p)) lim < 1. ε 0 µ(b ε (p)) 3
4 Now Lebesgue s density theorem (see e.g. [4]), says that for almost all points p of the Lebesgue measurable set T we have that µ(t B ε (p)) lim = 1. ε 0 µ(b ε (p)) This immediately implies that bd T has measure zero. Note that the genericity results in [1] have been formulated with respect to the Lebesgue measure, whereas those in [12] use the Hausdorff measure. However, it is known that the n- dimensional Lebesgue and Hausdorff measures in R n coincide (see, e.g., [11]). 2.2 An often used reasoning In this paper, we will use the following argument several times. Suppose some property depends on a parameter Q R M. As usual, we say that the property holds for almost all parameters, if the set Q := {Q R M the property does not hold for Q} has measure zero. Assume that for some N with 0 < N < M we have a decomposition of Q R M of the form Q = (Q 1, Q 2 ) with Q 1 R N, Q 2 R M N. Suppose further that for each fixed Q 1 R N in Q = (Q 1, Q 2 ) the property holds for almost all parameters Q 2 R M N. Then the property holds for almost all Q R M. Indeed, the assumption means that the set Q of parameters where the property does not hold is a set Q := R N Q 2 with a set Q 2 R M N of measure zero in R M N. But then Fubini s theorem (see, e.g., [6, Appendix 1]) implies that the set Q has measure zero in R M. 3 Genericity of Slater s condition In this section, we show that the Slater condition is a generic property for linear conic problems. 3.1 Slater s condition for problems in self-dual form In order to prove a genericity result, we first need to parametrize all problem instances. For this purpose, it is more appropriate to consider conic problems in so-called self-dual form: and max C, X C, B s.t. X (B + L) K. min B, Y s.t. Y (L C) K. (P ) (D) 4
5 where C, B R m, and L is a linear subspace of R m. We will sometimes write F P and F D to denote the feasible sets of (P ), (D) respectively. It is easy to see that the problems (P 0 ), (D 0 ) are equivalent to (P ), (D), respectively. Indeed, choose C S k satisfying A i, C = c i (i = 1,..., n) and put L := span{a i, i = 1,..., n}. Then the feasible sets of (P 0 ) and (P ) are clearly equal to each other, and their objective function values are the same since for X = B n i=1 x ia i we have C, X C, B = C, X B = C, ( n x i A i ) = i=1 n x i C, A i = c T x. Problems (D 0 ) and (D) have the same objective function, and a point Y is feasible for (D) iff Y K and i=1 Y + C L Y + C, A i = 0 for all i Y, A i = c i for all i by the relation between C and c. So the feasible sets of (D 0 ) and (D) are equal as well, and the problems are equivalent. Definition 3.1. We say that Slater s condition holds for (P ), if there exists X (B +L) int K. Analogously, we say that Slater s condition holds for (D), if there exists Y ( L C ) int K. We can parameterize instances of (P) by pairs (B, L) with B R m and L {A i, i = 1,..., n} R m n. We say that Slater s condition holds generically for problem (P ), if it holds for almost all feasible instances of (P ), i.e., the set of pairs (B, L) parametrizing feasible instances of (P ) which fail to fulfill Slater s condition has measure zero. Analogous definitions apply for (D). The next theorem shows that Slater s condition is indeed generic: Theorem 3.2. For almost all problem instances of (P ), we have that either the feasible set of (P ) is empty, i.e., (B + L) K =, or Slater s condition holds for (P ), i.e., (B + L) int K =. An analogous result holds for the dual program (D). Proof. We will show the theorem for the primal problem; the proof for (D) is analogous. To prove the theorem, we will show that for any fixed L the statement holds for almost all B R m. By the reasoning outlined in Section 2.2 it will then hold for all instances of (P ). So let us fix L. Then we can decompose B R m uniquely as B = B 1 B 2 such that B 1 L and B 2 L. By construction, we have B 2 + L = B + L and B 1 + L = L. Therefore, the feasibility of (P ) and the validity of the Slater condition is determined by B 2. Consider the projection P := proj L K of K onto L. Clearly, P is a convex set. We distinguish the following three cases. 5
6 Case 1: B 2 rint P. We will show that in this case Slater s condition holds. Since B 2 P, there exists a pre-image B proj 1 L (B 2 ) = (B+L) K. By construction, B+L = B 2 +L = B+L, so Slater s condition is equivalent to the condition ( B + L) int K. We will show that this always holds. To this end, suppose by contradiction that ( B + L) int K = and recall the assumption that int K =. Since B K, we clearly must have B bd K. Moreover, there must exist a hyperplane supporting K at the boundary point B and containing B +L, i.e., there exists N S k with N, Z N, B for all Z K and N, L = 0 for all L L. (3.1) Since B 2 rint P, there exists an open neighborhood N ε (B 2 ) rint P. By continuity of the projection, there exists an open neighborhood N δ ( B) such that proj L N δ ( B) N ε (B 2 ). The supporting hyperplane divides N δ ( B) into two parts. Take a point Q N δ ( B) such that N, Q < N, B. By construction, R := proj L (Q) N ε (B 2 ) rint P, so there must exist a pre-image R proj 1 L (R) = (Q + L) K. Since R K, we have from (3.1) that N, R N, B. (3.2) On the other hand, since R (Q + L), we can write R = Q + L for some L L. From (3.1) we have N, L = 0, which gives N, R = N, Q + L = N, Q < N, B, contradicting (3.2). Hence, our assumption must have been wrong, and therefore Slater s condition is indeed true in this case. Case 2: B 2 / cl P. Then by definition of the projection, we have = (B 2 +L) K = (B+L) K and the feasible set of (P ) is empty. Case 3: B 2 bd P. We will show that the set of parameters B for which this happens has measure zero. By Lemma 2.1, the set bd P L has zero measure in R m n. Therefore, its pre-image proj 1 L (bd P) = {B R m proj L (B) = B 2 bd P} must have zero measure in R m by the arguments from Section 2.2. Summarizing, we have shown that if we fix L, then for almost all B problem (P ) either fulfills (B + L) K =, i.e., (P ) is infeasible, or (B + L) int K =, i.e., (P ) fulfills the Slater condition. The argument from Section 2.2 now completes the proof. 3.2 Genericity of Slater s condition for problems in standard form So far, we have shown genericity of Slater s condition for the self-dual problems (P ) and (D). Next, we translate these results to the problems (P 0 ) and (D 0 ) in standard form. For the primal problems (P ) and (P 0 ) there is nothing to show, since the feasible sets of (P ) 6
7 and (P 0 ) depend on B in the same way. Therefore, the genericity result for (P ) in Theorem 3.2 directly translates to the same genericity of Slater s condition for (P 0 ). When we consider the dual problems (D) and (D 0 ), we have to transform the C-space S k R m into the c-space R n, and the genericity result for (D 0 ) requires a bit more work: Theorem 3.3. For almost all ( c, {A i } n i=1) we have: if (D0 ) is feasible, then it satisfies the Slater condition. Proof. We will show that for any fixed set {A i : i = 1,..., n} the statement is true for almost all c R n. The reasoning of Section 2.2 will then complete the proof. So fix {A i : i = 1,..., n} and put L = span{a i : i = 1,..., n}. Then we can write any C R m = L L as C = C 1 + C 2 with C 1 L R m n and C 2 = proj L (C) L R n, (3.3) where proj L denotes the projection onto L. Now choose C such that c i = A i, C for all i, and note that for Y S k we have Y (L C) if and only if A i, Y = A i, C = A i, C 2, and consequently A i, Y = c i for all i Y (L C). (3.4) Observe that since {A i } n i=1 are linearly independent, the relation A i, C 2 = c i for i = 1,..., n defines a linear bijection between C 2 and c: T : L R n, T (C 2 ) = c. (3.5) Combining (3.5) and (3.4), we conclude that Slater fails for (D 0 ) wrt. c Slater fails for (D) wrt. all C = C 1 + C 2, where C 1 L and C 2 = T 1 (c). It remains to show that the set C 2 := {C 2 L Slater fails for (D) wrt. C 2 and F D } has zero measure in L R n. To this end, recall that the genericity result for (D) in Theorem 3.2 implies that the set C := {C R m Slater fails for (D) and F D } has zero measure in R m. Using (3.4), we see that C = {(C 1, C 2 ) L L C 2 C 2 }. Invoking the argument from Section 2.2 for C, we conclude that C 2 has zero measure in L R n, as desired. 7
8 4 Other generic properties In this section, we first discuss the concept of nondegenerate solutions, and show how these relate to Slater s condition. Then we discuss strict complementarity and uniqueness of optimal solutions, and finally we summarize genericity results that follow from our earlier results as well as from the literature. 4.1 Nondegeneracy Let us denote the minimal face of K containing X and the minimal face of K containing Y, respectively, by J(X) = face(x, K) and G(Y ) = face(y, K ). Observe that for each feasible X we have X rint J(X). For a face F of K, we define the complementary face as F = {Q K Q, S = 0 for all S F }. Clearly, F is a closed convex cone. Moreover, it is not difficult to see that if X rint F, then F = {Q K Q, X = 0}. This immediately implies that the complementary face of J(X) is equivalently given by J (X) = {Q K Q, X = 0}. (4.1) Analogous definitions and results apply to G (Y ), the complementary face of G(Y ). Definition 4.1. The extreme points of F P (resp. F D ) are called primal (resp. dual) basic feasible solutions. The following characterization of basic solutions is given in [12, Theorem 1]: Lemma 4.2. Let X be feasible for (P ). Then X is a basic feasible solution if and only if span(j(x)) L = {0}. (4.2) Imposing the analogous condition for the dual problem gives the concept of (primal) nondegeneracy: Definition 4.3. A primal feasible solution X is called nondegenerate, if span(j (X)) L = {0}. (4.3) Nondegeneracy of the dual feasible solution Y is defined analogously. 8
9 We next discuss the connection between nondegeneracy and Slater s condition, and we will actually show that the existence of a nondegenerate solution implies Slater s condition. We first need a technical lemma: Lemma 4.4. Let X be a nondegenerate feasible solution of (P ), i.e., X F P span(j (X)) = {0}. Then there exists L L such that: and L S, L > 0 for all S J (X) B 1, (4.4) where B 1 := {S S = 1} is the unit sphere in R m. Proof. We will make use of the following theorem of the alternative (see [5, p.68]): Let I, J be (possibly infinite) index sets, and let b i, a j R m for i I, j J. Suppose the set conv{a j j J} is closed. Then precisely one of the following alternatives is true: { } aj, L > 0 for all j J (I) has a solution L b i, L = 0 for all i I (II) 0 conv{a j j J} + span{b i i I} For our purposes, let J := J (X) B 1, and let a S := S for S J. Then the set conv{s S J} is compact and 0 / conv{s S J}. Let further {B i i I} be a basis of L. Then obviously the nondegeneracy assumption for X implies L conv(j) =, and thus 0 / span{b i i I} + conv{s S J}. Therefore, system (I) must be true, i.e., there exist some L such that S, L > 0 for all S J and B i, L = 0 for all i I, i.e., L L, as desired. Theorem 4.5. Let X be a nondegenerate feasible solution of (P ). Then Slater s condition holds for (P ), i.e., (B + L) int K =. Analogous results are true for the problems (D), (P 0 ), and (D 0 ). Proof. We will show that there exist L L and α > 0 such that (X+αL) (B+ L) int K. Since X is nondegenerate, take L satisfying (4.4) as in the Lemma 4.4. Then clearly (X +αl) B +L since X B + L and L L. To prove (X + αl) int K, we have to show that X + αl, S > 0 for all S K B 1 (4.5) where B 1 := {S S = 1} is again the unit sphere. We will now construct an α > 0 such that this holds. It follows from (4.4) and the compactness of the set J (X) B 1 that there exists some ε > 0 such that L, S 2ε > 0 for all S J (X) B 1. By continuity of the linear function L,, 9
10 there exists some δ > 0 such that L, S ε for all S J δ (X) B 1, (4.6) where J δ (X) := {S K S S < δ for some S J (X)}. Since X K, we have X, S 0 for all S K, and by the definition of J (X) in (4.1) we have that X, S > 0 for all S (K \ J δ (X)) B 1. By compactness of this set, there exists some T such that X, S T > 0 for all S (K \ J δ (X)) B 1. (4.7) Let M := min{ L, S S (K \J δ (X)) B 1}. We claim that X+αL int K for all 0 < α < T M. We have the following two cases: S (K \ J δ (X)) B 1: then X + αl, S = X, S + αl, S T + αm > 0. S J δ (X) B 1: using X, S 0 and (4.6), we have X + αl, S = X, S + αl, S αε > 0. By combining these two cases, we have shown that (4.5) holds, and the result follows. For the case of semidefinite programming, it has been shown implicitly in [1, Proof of Theorem 14] that given L, for almost all B all feasible points of F P are nondegenerate. Hence, by applying Theorem 4.5 it follows for the SDP case that given L, for almost all B we have: if F P is nonempty, then F P has Slater points. We wish to mention that in geometric measure theory, transversality results have been proven which roughly speaking assert that generically all intersection points of two convex sets are nondegenerate. In [8, Lemma 3.1], e.g., the following result has been shown: Lemma 4.6. ([8, Lemma 3.1]) Let K, L R m be compact convex sets with nonempty interior. Then for almost all B R m (wrt. to Hausdorff measure) the sets K and B + L intersect almost transversally, i.e., for all X bd K bd L it holds N(K, X) N(L, X) = {0} and N(K, X) N(L, X) = {0} where N(K, X) denotes the normal cone of K at X. A similar result has been given in [16, Theorem 2]. In combination with Theorem 4.5, also these results could be used to show that generically the Slater condition holds. 4.2 Strict complementarity and uniqueness For optimal solutions X of (P ) and Y of (D), we denote J := face(x, K) and G := face(y, K ). 10
11 Definition 4.7. The optimal solutions X of (P ) and Y of (D) are called strictly complementary, if X rint J and Y rint J. (4.8) In [12], a slightly different definition is given: there the optimal solutions X and Y are called strictly complementary if X rint F and Y rint F (4.9) holds for some face F of K. It is clear that (4.8) implies (4.9). Conversely, let (4.9) be satisfied. We always have X rint J, and for X rint F, we have F = J by (4.1). Therefore, (4.8) and (4.9) are equivalent. The following lemma shows the relation between nondegeneracy, strict complementarity, basic solutions and uniqueness. Lemma 4.8. [12, Theorem 2] Let X be a feasible solution of (P ). Then the following hold. (a) If X is nondegenerate, then an arbitrary complementary solution of (D) must be basic. Moreover, if there is a complementary dual solution, it must be unique. (b) Suppose that Y is a dual solution and X and Y are strictly complementary. Then Y is basic if and only if X is nondegenerate. Another closely related definition of strict complementarity has been given in [13], where strict complementarity is defined as J = G. (4.10) It can be shown that (4.10) and (4.8) are equivalent, see the proof of [12, Theorem 2]. Similarly, considering the dual problem, strict complementarity can be defined as Y rint G and X rint G. (4.11) Neither of the conditions (4.8) or (4.11) implies the other unless K or K are facially exposed as noted in [13, Remark 3.3.2]. An illustrating example of these asymmetric strict complementarity definitions is given in [2, Example 1]. In [2, Definition 3.1], yet another strict complementarity definition is given. Note that not all cones normally used in optimization are facially exposed: it is well known that the semidefinite cone is facially exposed, but for instance the copositive cone is not, see [3]. We remark that strict complementarity plays a crucial role for the numerical performance of optimization algorithms. One example where this can be seen is [2], where an augmented primal-dual algorithm is developed to solve problems over the doubly nonnegative matrix cone. Strict complementarity is fundamental for this algorithm, since regularity of the augmented primal-dual function depends on this. 11
12 4.3 Genericity of strict complementarity, nondegeneracy, and uniqueness This section is devoted to results asserting that for almost all conic program instances certain regularity conditions hold, such as uniqueness, nondegeneracy and strict complementarity of solutions as well as the Slater condition. By combining the genericity result for the Slater condition in Theorem 3.2 with well known optimality conditions for conic programs, we obtain the following: Corollary 4.9. Let L be given. For almost all (B, C) R 2m, the following holds: (a) If both (P ) and (D) are feasible, then both have optimal solutions X, Y. (b) For each such pair the complementarity condition X, Y = 0 is satisfied. In particular the problems are gap free, i.e. v P = v D. For completeness we also recall the genericity results from [12] with respect to uniqueness and strict complementarity of optimal solutions. Genericity of uniqueness follows as argued in [12] e.g. by applying the following result from geometric measure theory for convex bodies. First, let us introduce some notation. For a closed convex set = T R l we recall the support function h(t, ) of T : for u R l we define h(t, u) := sup x, u (4.12) x T For u dom h(t, ) \ {0} the corresponding supporting hyperplane is given by H(T, u) := {x R n x, u = h(t, u)} with support set F (T, u) := H(T, u) T. Note that for given 0 u a solution of the convex problem in (4.12) is unique if and only if dim F (T, u) = 0. The next theorem precisely asserts that for almost all objective vectors u R l a solution of the convex program is unique. Theorem [15, Theorem 2.2.9] Let T R l be a compact, convex set. Then the set of all vectors u in the (l 1)-dimensional unit sphere B 1 := {u R l u = 1} which fulfill dim F (T, u) > 0 has (l 1)-dimensional Hausdorff measure zero. By combining this theorem with our previous results we obtain the following: Corollary Let L be given. Then for almost all (C, B) R 2m the following holds: If the corresponding conic programs (P ) and (D) are feasible, then the optimal solutions X, Y of (P ) and (D) are unique and satisfy X, Y = 0. Proof. For almost all C, we have that if (D) is feasible, then by Theorem 3.2 the Slater condition holds for (D). Thus, by well known results, the level sets F P (α) = {X (B + L) K C, X α} are compact. Applying Theorem 4.10 to a nonempty compact set T := F P (α), the result follows. 12
13 In [12] the genericity of strict complementarity of solutions of (P ) and (D) has been shown under the assumption that the problems are gap-free. For fixed L the authors consider the sets (see [12, p. 455 and Proposition 1]) D(L) = {(C, B) the corresponding problems (P ) and (D) are feasible with v P = v D } and D(L) := {(C, B) D(L) some optimal solutions X of (P ) and Y of (D) are strictly complementary }. Theorem [12, Proposition 2] For fixed L, the set D(L)\D(L) has dim(d(l))-dimensional Hausdorf measure zero. As in [12, p.456], to prove that the nondegeneracy condition holds generically at solutions of (P ), we combine Theorem 3.2, Corollary 4.9, Theorem 4.12, Corollary 4.11 and Lemma 4.8. Note that Lemma 4.8(b) does not hold for X and Y interchanged unless K is facially exposed. However, if we define strict complementarity as (4.11), then Lemma 4.8(b) holds for X and Y interchanged. Analogously, we can show that (4.11) is a generic property. Thus, using the same arguments, generically at solutions of (D) the nondegeneracy condition holds. Finally, combining everything, we have Corollary Let L be given arbitrarily. Then for almost all (C, B) R 2m the following is true: If the corresponding programs (P ), (D) are both feasible, then there exist unique optimal solutions X of (P ) and Y of (D). These solutions are nondegenerate and satisfy the strict complementarity condition. Let us finish this section by translating the previous results to the pair of primal/dual conic programs (P 0 ) and (D 0 ) in standard form. Recalling that under Slater s condition the upper/lower level sets of (P 0 ), (D 0 ) are compact, we can apply Theorem 4.10 as before and conclude that for any fixed {A i } n i=1 the following holds for almost all (c, B) R n S k : if (P 0 ), (D 0 ) are both feasible, then the solutions x, Y exist and are unique. Furthermore, with the same arguments as before in Theorem 3.3 by using the decompositions C = proj L (C) + proj L (C), B = proj L (B) + proj L (B) the genericity results with respect to strict complementarity in Theorem 4.12 translates from (P ), (D) to (P 0 ), (D 0 ) as well. Summarizing we have obtained the following. Corollary For almost all ( c, B, {A i } n i=1) we have: If (P0 ), (D 0 ) are both feasible, then there exist unique optimal solutions x of (P 0 ) and Y of (D 0 ). Moreover, X := B n i=1 x ia i and Y are both nondegenerate and satisfy the strict complementarity condition. 13
14 5 Conclusion In this paper we have proven that for almost all problem data ( C, B, {A i } n i=1) ) we have that if the corresponding conic programs are feasible, then they also have Slater points. Together with the earlier results in [1] and [12], this implies that the set of nice feasible conic programs with unique, nondegenerate and strictly complementary solutions is dense. However, from a practical viewpoint it is also important to know whether this set of nice problems is open, i.e., whether around a given nice problem the regularity conditions such as Slater s condition, uniqueness, nondegeneracy, strict complementarity of solutions are stable wrt. small perturbations of the problem data. We emphasize that in the theory of generic properties of nonlinear programs (founded by Jongen, Jonker, and Twilt, see e.g. [9]), usually a property is called generic if it holds for a subset of the data set which is dense (or stronger a set whose complement has measure zero) and open. Such stability questions in general conic programming will be discussed in a forthcoming paper. Here, we only wish to mention that the Slater condition is trivially stable. Indeed, assume that X = B n i=1 x ia i is a Slater point for (P ) wrt. to the data ( C, B, {A i } n i=1). Then also the point X := B n i=1 x ia i is a Slater point after any sufficiently small perturbation ( C, B, {A i } n ) i=1 of ( C, B, {A i } n i=1). Acknowledgements We would like to thank Jorge A. León for pointing out reference [10]. We also gratefully acknowledge support by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) through Vici grant no References [1] Alizadeh F., Haeberly J.A., and Overton M.L., Complementarity and nondegeneracy in semidefinite programming. Mathematical Programming 77 (1997), [2] Davi T. and Jarre F., Solving large scale problems over the doubly nonnegative cone. Preprint 2011, available at html [3] Dickinson, P.J.C., Geometry of the Copositive and Completely Positive Cones. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 380 (2011), [4] Faure C.A., A short proof of Lebesgue s density theorem. The American Mathematical Monthly 109 (2002), [5] Goberna M.A., Lopez M.A., Linear Semi-Infinite Optimization. John Wiley and Sons (1998) 14
15 [6] Guillemin V., Pollack A., Differential Topology. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, (1974). [7] Hettich R., Kortanek K., Semi-infinite programming : Theory, methods and applications. SIAM Review 35(3) (1993), [8] Hug H. and Schätzle R., Intersections and translative integral formulas for boundaries of convex bodies. Mathematische Nachrichten 226 (2001), [9] Jongen H.T., Jonker P., and Twilt F., Nonlinear optimization in finite dimensions. Morse theory, Chebyshev approximation, transversality, flows, parametric aspects. Nonconvex Optimization and its Applications 47, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, [10] Lang R., A note on the measurability of convex sets. Archiv der Mathematik 47 (1986), [11] Morgan F., Geometric measure theory. Academic Press, San Diego, [12] Pataki G. and Tunçel L., On the generic properties of convex optimization problems in conic form. Mathematical Programming 89 (2001), [13] Pataki G., The geometry of semidefinite programming, 29 65, Handbook of Semidefinite Programming, Wolkowicz H., Saigal R., Vandenberghe L. (Eds), Kluwer Academic Publishers, [14] Shapiro A., First and second order analysis of nonlinear semidefinite programs. Mathematical Programming 77 (1997), [15] Schneider R., Convex bodies: the Brunn-Minkowski theory. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications 44, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, [16] Schneider R., Convex bodies in exceptional relative positions. Journal of the London Mathematical Society (2) 6 (1999),
Duality of linear conic problems
Duality of linear conic problems Alexander Shapiro and Arkadi Nemirovski Abstract It is well known that the optimal values of a linear programming problem and its dual are equal to each other if at least
More information2.3 Convex Constrained Optimization Problems
42 CHAPTER 2. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN CONVEX OPTIMIZATION Theorem 15 Let f : R n R and h : R R. Consider g(x) = h(f(x)) for all x R n. The function g is convex if either of the following two conditions
More informationSOLUTIONS TO ASSIGNMENT 1 MATH 576
SOLUTIONS TO ASSIGNMENT 1 MATH 576 SOLUTIONS BY OLIVIER MARTIN 13 #5. Let T be the topology generated by A on X. We want to show T = J B J where B is the set of all topologies J on X with A J. This amounts
More informationCompletely Positive Cone and its Dual
On the Computational Complexity of Membership Problems for the Completely Positive Cone and its Dual Peter J.C. Dickinson Luuk Gijben July 3, 2012 Abstract Copositive programming has become a useful tool
More informationMax-Min Representation of Piecewise Linear Functions
Beiträge zur Algebra und Geometrie Contributions to Algebra and Geometry Volume 43 (2002), No. 1, 297-302. Max-Min Representation of Piecewise Linear Functions Sergei Ovchinnikov Mathematics Department,
More informationNOTES ON LINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS
NOTES ON LINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS Definition 1. Let V and W be vector spaces. A function T : V W is a linear transformation from V to W if the following two properties hold. i T v + v = T v + T v for all
More informationResearch Article Stability Analysis for Higher-Order Adjacent Derivative in Parametrized Vector Optimization
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Journal of Inequalities and Applications Volume 2010, Article ID 510838, 15 pages doi:10.1155/2010/510838 Research Article Stability Analysis for Higher-Order Adjacent Derivative
More informationSystems of Linear Equations
Systems of Linear Equations Beifang Chen Systems of linear equations Linear systems A linear equation in variables x, x,, x n is an equation of the form a x + a x + + a n x n = b, where a, a,, a n and
More information(Basic definitions and properties; Separation theorems; Characterizations) 1.1 Definition, examples, inner description, algebraic properties
Lecture 1 Convex Sets (Basic definitions and properties; Separation theorems; Characterizations) 1.1 Definition, examples, inner description, algebraic properties 1.1.1 A convex set In the school geometry
More information1 if 1 x 0 1 if 0 x 1
Chapter 3 Continuity In this chapter we begin by defining the fundamental notion of continuity for real valued functions of a single real variable. When trying to decide whether a given function is or
More informationMetric Spaces. Chapter 7. 7.1. Metrics
Chapter 7 Metric Spaces A metric space is a set X that has a notion of the distance d(x, y) between every pair of points x, y X. The purpose of this chapter is to introduce metric spaces and give some
More informationLEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR THIS CHAPTER
CHAPTER 2 American mathematician Paul Halmos (1916 2006), who in 1942 published the first modern linear algebra book. The title of Halmos s book was the same as the title of this chapter. Finite-Dimensional
More informationSolutions to Math 51 First Exam January 29, 2015
Solutions to Math 5 First Exam January 29, 25. ( points) (a) Complete the following sentence: A set of vectors {v,..., v k } is defined to be linearly dependent if (2 points) there exist c,... c k R, not
More informationNo: 10 04. Bilkent University. Monotonic Extension. Farhad Husseinov. Discussion Papers. Department of Economics
No: 10 04 Bilkent University Monotonic Extension Farhad Husseinov Discussion Papers Department of Economics The Discussion Papers of the Department of Economics are intended to make the initial results
More informationFinite dimensional topological vector spaces
Chapter 3 Finite dimensional topological vector spaces 3.1 Finite dimensional Hausdorff t.v.s. Let X be a vector space over the field K of real or complex numbers. We know from linear algebra that the
More informationSolving Systems of Linear Equations
LECTURE 5 Solving Systems of Linear Equations Recall that we introduced the notion of matrices as a way of standardizing the expression of systems of linear equations In today s lecture I shall show how
More informationLECTURE 5: DUALITY AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS. 1. Dual linear program 2. Duality theory 3. Sensitivity analysis 4. Dual simplex method
LECTURE 5: DUALITY AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 1. Dual linear program 2. Duality theory 3. Sensitivity analysis 4. Dual simplex method Introduction to dual linear program Given a constraint matrix A, right
More informationA NEW LOOK AT CONVEX ANALYSIS AND OPTIMIZATION
1 A NEW LOOK AT CONVEX ANALYSIS AND OPTIMIZATION Dimitri Bertsekas M.I.T. FEBRUARY 2003 2 OUTLINE Convexity issues in optimization Historical remarks Our treatment of the subject Three unifying lines of
More informationSurface bundles over S 1, the Thurston norm, and the Whitehead link
Surface bundles over S 1, the Thurston norm, and the Whitehead link Michael Landry August 16, 2014 The Thurston norm is a powerful tool for studying the ways a 3-manifold can fiber over the circle. In
More informationPractical Guide to the Simplex Method of Linear Programming
Practical Guide to the Simplex Method of Linear Programming Marcel Oliver Revised: April, 0 The basic steps of the simplex algorithm Step : Write the linear programming problem in standard form Linear
More informationTHE DIMENSION OF A VECTOR SPACE
THE DIMENSION OF A VECTOR SPACE KEITH CONRAD This handout is a supplementary discussion leading up to the definition of dimension and some of its basic properties. Let V be a vector space over a field
More information3. Linear Programming and Polyhedral Combinatorics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Handout 6 18.433: Combinatorial Optimization February 20th, 2009 Michel X. Goemans 3. Linear Programming and Polyhedral Combinatorics Summary of what was seen in the
More informationAdaptive Online Gradient Descent
Adaptive Online Gradient Descent Peter L Bartlett Division of Computer Science Department of Statistics UC Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94709 bartlett@csberkeleyedu Elad Hazan IBM Almaden Research Center 650
More informationINCIDENCE-BETWEENNESS GEOMETRY
INCIDENCE-BETWEENNESS GEOMETRY MATH 410, CSUSM. SPRING 2008. PROFESSOR AITKEN This document covers the geometry that can be developed with just the axioms related to incidence and betweenness. The full
More informationIntroduction to Topology
Introduction to Topology Tomoo Matsumura November 30, 2010 Contents 1 Topological spaces 3 1.1 Basis of a Topology......................................... 3 1.2 Comparing Topologies.......................................
More informationLinear Algebra I. Ronald van Luijk, 2012
Linear Algebra I Ronald van Luijk, 2012 With many parts from Linear Algebra I by Michael Stoll, 2007 Contents 1. Vector spaces 3 1.1. Examples 3 1.2. Fields 4 1.3. The field of complex numbers. 6 1.4.
More informationINDISTINGUISHABILITY OF ABSOLUTELY CONTINUOUS AND SINGULAR DISTRIBUTIONS
INDISTINGUISHABILITY OF ABSOLUTELY CONTINUOUS AND SINGULAR DISTRIBUTIONS STEVEN P. LALLEY AND ANDREW NOBEL Abstract. It is shown that there are no consistent decision rules for the hypothesis testing problem
More informationFUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS LECTURE NOTES: QUOTIENT SPACES
FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS LECTURE NOTES: QUOTIENT SPACES CHRISTOPHER HEIL 1. Cosets and the Quotient Space Any vector space is an abelian group under the operation of vector addition. So, if you are have studied
More informationAn Introduction on SemiDefinite Program
An Introduction on SemiDefinite Program from the viewpoint of computation Hayato Waki Institute of Mathematics for Industry, Kyushu University 2015-10-08 Combinatorial Optimization at Work, Berlin, 2015
More informationSeparation Properties for Locally Convex Cones
Journal of Convex Analysis Volume 9 (2002), No. 1, 301 307 Separation Properties for Locally Convex Cones Walter Roth Department of Mathematics, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Gadong BE1410, Brunei Darussalam
More informationWhat is Linear Programming?
Chapter 1 What is Linear Programming? An optimization problem usually has three essential ingredients: a variable vector x consisting of a set of unknowns to be determined, an objective function of x to
More informationGeometrical Characterization of RN-operators between Locally Convex Vector Spaces
Geometrical Characterization of RN-operators between Locally Convex Vector Spaces OLEG REINOV St. Petersburg State University Dept. of Mathematics and Mechanics Universitetskii pr. 28, 198504 St, Petersburg
More informationDuality in Linear Programming
Duality in Linear Programming 4 In the preceding chapter on sensitivity analysis, we saw that the shadow-price interpretation of the optimal simplex multipliers is a very useful concept. First, these shadow
More informationBANACH AND HILBERT SPACE REVIEW
BANACH AND HILBET SPACE EVIEW CHISTOPHE HEIL These notes will briefly review some basic concepts related to the theory of Banach and Hilbert spaces. We are not trying to give a complete development, but
More information4.5 Linear Dependence and Linear Independence
4.5 Linear Dependence and Linear Independence 267 32. {v 1, v 2 }, where v 1, v 2 are collinear vectors in R 3. 33. Prove that if S and S are subsets of a vector space V such that S is a subset of S, then
More informationLinear Algebra. A vector space (over R) is an ordered quadruple. such that V is a set; 0 V ; and the following eight axioms hold:
Linear Algebra A vector space (over R) is an ordered quadruple (V, 0, α, µ) such that V is a set; 0 V ; and the following eight axioms hold: α : V V V and µ : R V V ; (i) α(α(u, v), w) = α(u, α(v, w)),
More informationMA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms.
MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms. This text is based on the following books: Fundamental concepts of topology by Peter O Neil Elements of Mathematics: General Topology by Nicolas Bourbaki Counterexamples
More informationFurther Study on Strong Lagrangian Duality Property for Invex Programs via Penalty Functions 1
Further Study on Strong Lagrangian Duality Property for Invex Programs via Penalty Functions 1 J. Zhang Institute of Applied Mathematics, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing
More informationCHAPTER 1 BASIC TOPOLOGY
CHAPTER 1 BASIC TOPOLOGY Topology, sometimes referred to as the mathematics of continuity, or rubber sheet geometry, or the theory of abstract topological spaces, is all of these, but, above all, it is
More informationShape Optimization Problems over Classes of Convex Domains
Shape Optimization Problems over Classes of Convex Domains Giuseppe BUTTAZZO Dipartimento di Matematica Via Buonarroti, 2 56127 PISA ITALY e-mail: buttazzo@sab.sns.it Paolo GUASONI Scuola Normale Superiore
More informationMATH10212 Linear Algebra. Systems of Linear Equations. Definition. An n-dimensional vector is a row or a column of n numbers (or letters): a 1.
MATH10212 Linear Algebra Textbook: D. Poole, Linear Algebra: A Modern Introduction. Thompson, 2006. ISBN 0-534-40596-7. Systems of Linear Equations Definition. An n-dimensional vector is a row or a column
More informationLecture 2: August 29. Linear Programming (part I)
10-725: Convex Optimization Fall 2013 Lecture 2: August 29 Lecturer: Barnabás Póczos Scribes: Samrachana Adhikari, Mattia Ciollaro, Fabrizio Lecci Note: LaTeX template courtesy of UC Berkeley EECS dept.
More informationConvex Programming Tools for Disjunctive Programs
Convex Programming Tools for Disjunctive Programs João Soares, Departamento de Matemática, Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal Abstract A Disjunctive Program (DP) is a mathematical program whose feasible
More information1. Prove that the empty set is a subset of every set.
1. Prove that the empty set is a subset of every set. Basic Topology Written by Men-Gen Tsai email: b89902089@ntu.edu.tw Proof: For any element x of the empty set, x is also an element of every set since
More information160 CHAPTER 4. VECTOR SPACES
160 CHAPTER 4. VECTOR SPACES 4. Rank and Nullity In this section, we look at relationships between the row space, column space, null space of a matrix and its transpose. We will derive fundamental results
More informationMATH 304 Linear Algebra Lecture 18: Rank and nullity of a matrix.
MATH 304 Linear Algebra Lecture 18: Rank and nullity of a matrix. Nullspace Let A = (a ij ) be an m n matrix. Definition. The nullspace of the matrix A, denoted N(A), is the set of all n-dimensional column
More informationOn the representability of the bi-uniform matroid
On the representability of the bi-uniform matroid Simeon Ball, Carles Padró, Zsuzsa Weiner and Chaoping Xing August 3, 2012 Abstract Every bi-uniform matroid is representable over all sufficiently large
More informationContinued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm
Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm Lecture notes prepared for MATH 326, Spring 997 Department of Mathematics and Statistics University at Albany William F Hammond Table of Contents Introduction
More informationLecture 7: Finding Lyapunov Functions 1
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 6.243j (Fall 2003): DYNAMICS OF NONLINEAR SYSTEMS by A. Megretski Lecture 7: Finding Lyapunov Functions 1
More informationMetric Spaces. Chapter 1
Chapter 1 Metric Spaces Many of the arguments you have seen in several variable calculus are almost identical to the corresponding arguments in one variable calculus, especially arguments concerning convergence
More informationMathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces
Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces D. R. Wilkins Academic Year 1996-7 9 Vector Spaces A vector space over some field K is an algebraic structure consisting of a set V on which are
More informationISOMETRIES OF R n KEITH CONRAD
ISOMETRIES OF R n KEITH CONRAD 1. Introduction An isometry of R n is a function h: R n R n that preserves the distance between vectors: h(v) h(w) = v w for all v and w in R n, where (x 1,..., x n ) = x
More informationALMOST COMMON PRIORS 1. INTRODUCTION
ALMOST COMMON PRIORS ZIV HELLMAN ABSTRACT. What happens when priors are not common? We introduce a measure for how far a type space is from having a common prior, which we term prior distance. If a type
More informationLectures notes on orthogonal matrices (with exercises) 92.222 - Linear Algebra II - Spring 2004 by D. Klain
Lectures notes on orthogonal matrices (with exercises) 92.222 - Linear Algebra II - Spring 2004 by D. Klain 1. Orthogonal matrices and orthonormal sets An n n real-valued matrix A is said to be an orthogonal
More information16.3 Fredholm Operators
Lectures 16 and 17 16.3 Fredholm Operators A nice way to think about compact operators is to show that set of compact operators is the closure of the set of finite rank operator in operator norm. In this
More information1. Introduction. PROPER HOLOMORPHIC MAPPINGS BETWEEN RIGID POLYNOMIAL DOMAINS IN C n+1
Publ. Mat. 45 (2001), 69 77 PROPER HOLOMORPHIC MAPPINGS BETWEEN RIGID POLYNOMIAL DOMAINS IN C n+1 Bernard Coupet and Nabil Ourimi Abstract We describe the branch locus of proper holomorphic mappings between
More informationClassification of Cartan matrices
Chapter 7 Classification of Cartan matrices In this chapter we describe a classification of generalised Cartan matrices This classification can be compared as the rough classification of varieties in terms
More informationRecall that two vectors in are perpendicular or orthogonal provided that their dot
Orthogonal Complements and Projections Recall that two vectors in are perpendicular or orthogonal provided that their dot product vanishes That is, if and only if Example 1 The vectors in are orthogonal
More informationOn SDP- and CP-relaxations and on connections between SDP-, CP and SIP
On SDP- and CP-relaations and on connections between SDP-, CP and SIP Georg Still and Faizan Ahmed University of Twente p 1/12 1. IP and SDP-, CP-relaations Integer program: IP) : min T Q s.t. a T j =
More informationThis asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.
3. Axioms of Set theory Before presenting the axioms of set theory, we first make a few basic comments about the relevant first order logic. We will give a somewhat more detailed discussion later, but
More informationOn Minimal Valid Inequalities for Mixed Integer Conic Programs
On Minimal Valid Inequalities for Mixed Integer Conic Programs Fatma Kılınç Karzan June 27, 2013 Abstract We study mixed integer conic sets involving a general regular (closed, convex, full dimensional,
More information4: SINGLE-PERIOD MARKET MODELS
4: SINGLE-PERIOD MARKET MODELS Ben Goldys and Marek Rutkowski School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Semester 2, 2015 B. Goldys and M. Rutkowski (USydney) Slides 4: Single-Period Market
More informationTOPOLOGY: THE JOURNEY INTO SEPARATION AXIOMS
TOPOLOGY: THE JOURNEY INTO SEPARATION AXIOMS VIPUL NAIK Abstract. In this journey, we are going to explore the so called separation axioms in greater detail. We shall try to understand how these axioms
More informationMath 4310 Handout - Quotient Vector Spaces
Math 4310 Handout - Quotient Vector Spaces Dan Collins The textbook defines a subspace of a vector space in Chapter 4, but it avoids ever discussing the notion of a quotient space. This is understandable
More informationMixedÀ¾ нOptimization Problem via Lagrange Multiplier Theory
MixedÀ¾ нOptimization Problem via Lagrange Multiplier Theory Jun WuÝ, Sheng ChenÞand Jian ChuÝ ÝNational Laboratory of Industrial Control Technology Institute of Advanced Process Control Zhejiang University,
More informationSimilarity and Diagonalization. Similar Matrices
MATH022 Linear Algebra Brief lecture notes 48 Similarity and Diagonalization Similar Matrices Let A and B be n n matrices. We say that A is similar to B if there is an invertible n n matrix P such that
More informationMatrix Representations of Linear Transformations and Changes of Coordinates
Matrix Representations of Linear Transformations and Changes of Coordinates 01 Subspaces and Bases 011 Definitions A subspace V of R n is a subset of R n that contains the zero element and is closed under
More informationFIXED POINT SETS OF FIBER-PRESERVING MAPS
FIXED POINT SETS OF FIBER-PRESERVING MAPS Robert F. Brown Department of Mathematics University of California Los Angeles, CA 90095 e-mail: rfb@math.ucla.edu Christina L. Soderlund Department of Mathematics
More informationOn Nicely Smooth Banach Spaces
E extracta mathematicae Vol. 16, Núm. 1, 27 45 (2001) On Nicely Smooth Banach Spaces Pradipta Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna Basu Stat-Math Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 203 B.T. Road, Calcutta 700035,
More informationNotes on Orthogonal and Symmetric Matrices MENU, Winter 2013
Notes on Orthogonal and Symmetric Matrices MENU, Winter 201 These notes summarize the main properties and uses of orthogonal and symmetric matrices. We covered quite a bit of material regarding these topics,
More information5. Linear algebra I: dimension
5. Linear algebra I: dimension 5.1 Some simple results 5.2 Bases and dimension 5.3 Homomorphisms and dimension 1. Some simple results Several observations should be made. Once stated explicitly, the proofs
More informationTiers, Preference Similarity, and the Limits on Stable Partners
Tiers, Preference Similarity, and the Limits on Stable Partners KANDORI, Michihiro, KOJIMA, Fuhito, and YASUDA, Yosuke February 7, 2010 Preliminary and incomplete. Do not circulate. Abstract We consider
More informationInner Product Spaces and Orthogonality
Inner Product Spaces and Orthogonality week 3-4 Fall 2006 Dot product of R n The inner product or dot product of R n is a function, defined by u, v a b + a 2 b 2 + + a n b n for u a, a 2,, a n T, v b,
More informationDate: April 12, 2001. Contents
2 Lagrange Multipliers Date: April 12, 2001 Contents 2.1. Introduction to Lagrange Multipliers......... p. 2 2.2. Enhanced Fritz John Optimality Conditions...... p. 12 2.3. Informative Lagrange Multipliers...........
More informationWalrasian Demand. u(x) where B(p, w) = {x R n + : p x w}.
Walrasian Demand Econ 2100 Fall 2015 Lecture 5, September 16 Outline 1 Walrasian Demand 2 Properties of Walrasian Demand 3 An Optimization Recipe 4 First and Second Order Conditions Definition Walrasian
More informationMathematical Induction
Mathematical Induction (Handout March 8, 01) The Principle of Mathematical Induction provides a means to prove infinitely many statements all at once The principle is logical rather than strictly mathematical,
More informationSOLUTIONS TO EXERCISES FOR. MATHEMATICS 205A Part 3. Spaces with special properties
SOLUTIONS TO EXERCISES FOR MATHEMATICS 205A Part 3 Fall 2008 III. Spaces with special properties III.1 : Compact spaces I Problems from Munkres, 26, pp. 170 172 3. Show that a finite union of compact subspaces
More informationPROJECTIVE GEOMETRY. b3 course 2003. Nigel Hitchin
PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY b3 course 2003 Nigel Hitchin hitchin@maths.ox.ac.uk 1 1 Introduction This is a course on projective geometry. Probably your idea of geometry in the past has been based on triangles
More informationThe cover SU(2) SO(3) and related topics
The cover SU(2) SO(3) and related topics Iordan Ganev December 2011 Abstract The subgroup U of unit quaternions is isomorphic to SU(2) and is a double cover of SO(3). This allows a simple computation of
More informationRow Echelon Form and Reduced Row Echelon Form
These notes closely follow the presentation of the material given in David C Lay s textbook Linear Algebra and its Applications (3rd edition) These notes are intended primarily for in-class presentation
More informationNotes on metric spaces
Notes on metric spaces 1 Introduction The purpose of these notes is to quickly review some of the basic concepts from Real Analysis, Metric Spaces and some related results that will be used in this course.
More informationSeveral Views of Support Vector Machines
Several Views of Support Vector Machines Ryan M. Rifkin Honda Research Institute USA, Inc. Human Intention Understanding Group 2007 Tikhonov Regularization We are considering algorithms of the form min
More informationRow Ideals and Fibers of Morphisms
Michigan Math. J. 57 (2008) Row Ideals and Fibers of Morphisms David Eisenbud & Bernd Ulrich Affectionately dedicated to Mel Hochster, who has been an inspiration to us for many years, on the occasion
More informationMathematical finance and linear programming (optimization)
Mathematical finance and linear programming (optimization) Geir Dahl September 15, 2009 1 Introduction The purpose of this short note is to explain how linear programming (LP) (=linear optimization) may
More informationCHAPTER 9. Integer Programming
CHAPTER 9 Integer Programming An integer linear program (ILP) is, by definition, a linear program with the additional constraint that all variables take integer values: (9.1) max c T x s t Ax b and x integral
More information1 Local Brouwer degree
1 Local Brouwer degree Let D R n be an open set and f : S R n be continuous, D S and c R n. Suppose that the set f 1 (c) D is compact. (1) Then the local Brouwer degree of f at c in the set D is defined.
More informationMATH1231 Algebra, 2015 Chapter 7: Linear maps
MATH1231 Algebra, 2015 Chapter 7: Linear maps A/Prof. Daniel Chan School of Mathematics and Statistics University of New South Wales danielc@unsw.edu.au Daniel Chan (UNSW) MATH1231 Algebra 1 / 43 Chapter
More informationCURVES WHOSE SECANT DEGREE IS ONE IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC. 1. Introduction
Acta Math. Univ. Comenianae Vol. LXXXI, 1 (2012), pp. 71 77 71 CURVES WHOSE SECANT DEGREE IS ONE IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC E. BALLICO Abstract. Here we study (in positive characteristic) integral curves
More informationContinuity of the Perron Root
Linear and Multilinear Algebra http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081087.2014.934233 ArXiv: 1407.7564 (http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7564) Continuity of the Perron Root Carl D. Meyer Department of Mathematics, North
More informationSection 4.4 Inner Product Spaces
Section 4.4 Inner Product Spaces In our discussion of vector spaces the specific nature of F as a field, other than the fact that it is a field, has played virtually no role. In this section we no longer
More informationMetric Spaces Joseph Muscat 2003 (Last revised May 2009)
1 Distance J Muscat 1 Metric Spaces Joseph Muscat 2003 (Last revised May 2009) (A revised and expanded version of these notes are now published by Springer.) 1 Distance A metric space can be thought of
More informationI. GROUPS: BASIC DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES
I GROUPS: BASIC DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES Definition 1: An operation on a set G is a function : G G G Definition 2: A group is a set G which is equipped with an operation and a special element e G, called
More informationChapter 17. Orthogonal Matrices and Symmetries of Space
Chapter 17. Orthogonal Matrices and Symmetries of Space Take a random matrix, say 1 3 A = 4 5 6, 7 8 9 and compare the lengths of e 1 and Ae 1. The vector e 1 has length 1, while Ae 1 = (1, 4, 7) has length
More informationMinkowski Sum of Polytopes Defined by Their Vertices
Minkowski Sum of Polytopes Defined by Their Vertices Vincent Delos, Denis Teissandier To cite this version: Vincent Delos, Denis Teissandier. Minkowski Sum of Polytopes Defined by Their Vertices. Journal
More information24. The Branch and Bound Method
24. The Branch and Bound Method It has serious practical consequences if it is known that a combinatorial problem is NP-complete. Then one can conclude according to the present state of science that no
More informationMathematical Methods of Engineering Analysis
Mathematical Methods of Engineering Analysis Erhan Çinlar Robert J. Vanderbei February 2, 2000 Contents Sets and Functions 1 1 Sets................................... 1 Subsets.............................
More informationt := maxγ ν subject to ν {0,1,2,...} and f(x c +γ ν d) f(x c )+cγ ν f (x c ;d).
1. Line Search Methods Let f : R n R be given and suppose that x c is our current best estimate of a solution to P min x R nf(x). A standard method for improving the estimate x c is to choose a direction
More information88 CHAPTER 2. VECTOR FUNCTIONS. . First, we need to compute T (s). a By definition, r (s) T (s) = 1 a sin s a. sin s a, cos s a
88 CHAPTER. VECTOR FUNCTIONS.4 Curvature.4.1 Definitions and Examples The notion of curvature measures how sharply a curve bends. We would expect the curvature to be 0 for a straight line, to be very small
More informationT ( a i x i ) = a i T (x i ).
Chapter 2 Defn 1. (p. 65) Let V and W be vector spaces (over F ). We call a function T : V W a linear transformation form V to W if, for all x, y V and c F, we have (a) T (x + y) = T (x) + T (y) and (b)
More informationA Lagrangian-DNN Relaxation: a Fast Method for Computing Tight Lower Bounds for a Class of Quadratic Optimization Problems
A Lagrangian-DNN Relaxation: a Fast Method for Computing Tight Lower Bounds for a Class of Quadratic Optimization Problems Sunyoung Kim, Masakazu Kojima and Kim-Chuan Toh October 2013 Abstract. We propose
More information